rehmwa 2 #26 January 8, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo if he uses weird numbers, why is it 3 in the Bible? because it was written for stupid bipedal carbon based life forms ... Well, now that we understand decimals and relativity and quantum mechanics and Fermat's last theorem, maybe a re-write of the Bible is in order to remove all the stuff written specifically for neolithic tribes. Miss Hoover? My cat's breath smells like cat food. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #27 January 8, 2004 hey !!!! are you calling my ancient hebrew fathers neolithic ? the bible and all religions was needed in order to explain things we dont understand, hence devine. there will alwaus be a need for some kind of religion, even if u call it math and the prophet is Fermat... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Push 0 #28 January 8, 2004 Fermat's Last Theorem annoys me to no end. It's a completely useless result that just happens to be the simplest numerical illustration of the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture. I've only used it once in my life, and that's as a semi-joke solution to a problem from a Rings and Fields course which just happened to be the FLT with z=1. The fact that the FLT has finally been proven has not advanced our understanding of mathematics at all. The conjecture it follows from is a pretty big deal, yes, but the FLT is just a small bit of useless info that falls off the side. Now, if someone wants to prove Reimann's Conjecture, then we can talk Oh, and by the way, kallend was right about Zeno's paradox. It's just a convergent infinite series (1/2^n, in fact). What Zeno could not understand is how you can add up infinitely many small things and still get a finite answer. We know better now. There are perfectly legitimate things in analysis and set theory that would destroy your brain. Maybe I'll post some of them -- Toggle Whippin' Yahoo Skydiving is easy. All you have to do is relax while plummetting at 120 mph from 10,000' with nothing but some nylon and webbing to save you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #29 January 8, 2004 You guys are going straight to Hayulll. I always knew that education would cause people to stray from the truth. I am fortunate to not have been a victim of the ravages of education. I already have the suspicion that I was educated beyond my intelligence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydivingNurse 0 #30 January 8, 2004 Quade, that has to be one of the coolest sites I've seen in a while (aside from this and BeerAdvocate.com), thanks for the new book mark. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masher 1 #31 January 9, 2004 Didn't Kansas legislate that pi = 3 ?? I seem to recall some American state doing that...-- Arching is overrated - Marlies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dbattman 0 #32 January 9, 2004 Actually, I think we need to repeal the second law of thermodynamics. We can't bring our kids up in a world that is destined to end in chaos. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #33 January 9, 2004 Quote Didn't Kansas legislate that pi = 3 ?? Nope. http://www.snopes.com/religion/pi.htmquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #34 January 9, 2004 Pi = 3 +- 5% That's pretty good in physics. Oh and if you didn't know, in physics we got rid of divergent integrals by replacing them with experimentally measured values like charge and mass. We call it "renormalization". Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #35 January 9, 2004 Quote That's pretty good in physics. But not really good enough for orbital mechanics . . .quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #36 January 9, 2004 QuoteQuote That's pretty good in physics. But not really good enough for orbital mechanics . . . I didn't know orbitals needed tune-ups and repairs. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masher 1 #37 January 9, 2004 ever seen a quantum mechanic? Neither have I -- Arching is overrated - Marlies Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #38 January 9, 2004 I went to a college that was notorious for hard tests. Calculators were not allowed during tests for any undergrad physics tests (as well as most other subjects), so part of the trick of taking tests was learning how to round properly so that the numbers stayed whole and the problems were solved easier. If you were close to the actual number after all the rounding, you got partial credit, which was all you could ask for on these tests. I remember one test that was particularly bad - the average score was 16 out of 100. The prof posted the answers on his office door the day after the test. One problem no one got right - I mean no one - so we were all curious how the professor solved the problem. In the middle of the third page of crunching numbers, with the usual rounding, he actually had a line that said this: 2 + 2 = 5, for a very large 2 By "very large 2", he meant 2.4 or so. The rest of us were using 4 at that point, which made the second differential equation particularly difficult. Ah, tales from engineering school Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #39 January 9, 2004 Quoteever seen a quantum mechanic? Neither have I Actually... there are a few downstairs from me at work. or are they. Won't know until I go downstairs I guess. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
indyz 1 #40 January 9, 2004 QuoteI remember one test that was particularly bad - the average score was 16 out of 100. Heh. I got a 14 out of 100 on a discrete math midterm. B minus! The adjustment was so extreme that the high scorer (70-something) didn't have to do any homework or even take the final to get an A in the class. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeteH 0 #41 January 9, 2004 http://www.cecm.sfu.ca/projects/ISC/Pihistory.html Babylonians 2000? BCE 1 3.125 = 3 + 1/8 Egyptians 2000? BCE 1 3.16045 China 1200? BCE 1 3 Bible (1 Kings 7:23) 550? BCE 1 3 Archimedes 250? BCE 3 3.1418 (ave.) Hon Han Shu 130 AD 1 3.1622 = sqrt(10) ? Ptolemy 150 3 3.14166 Chung Hing 250? 1 3.16227 = sqrt(10) Wang Fau 250? 1 3.15555 = 142/45 Liu Hui 263 5 3.14159 Siddhanta 380 3 3.1416 Tsu Ch'ung Chi 480? 7 3.1415926 Aryabhata 499 4 3.14156 Brahmagupta 640? 1 3.162277 = sqrt(10) Al-Khowarizmi 800 4 3.1416 Fibonacci 1220 3 3.141818 Al-Kashi 1429 14 Otho 1573 6 3.1415929 Viete 1593 9 3.1415926536 (ave.) Christians copied base of their religion from Egyptians. Why not closer estimation for pi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #42 January 9, 2004 Quote Christians copied base of their religion from Egyptians. Why not closer estimation for pi? You mean besides the fact that Kings is part of the "Old Testament" and had nothing to do with the Christians?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeteH 0 #43 January 9, 2004 QuoteQuote Christians copied base of their religion from Egyptians. Why not closer estimation for pi? You mean besides the fact that Kings is part of the "Old Testament" and had nothing to do with the Christians? My bad. Fingers were faster than thoughts. I meant Judeans (or whatever Moses&pals were) that were/are the link between Egyptians and christians. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #44 January 9, 2004 QuoteI meant Judeans (or whatever Moses&pals were) that were/are the link between Egyptians and christians link between Egyptians and christians ?? thats a new description for the role of the hebrew people in history... so what were the romans? O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
falxori 0 #45 January 9, 2004 Quote2 + 2 = 5, for a very large 2 By "very large 2", he meant 2.4 or so. The rest of us were using 4 at that point, which made the second differential equation particularly difficult point to self, never use or get near anything this proffesor has designed... "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #46 January 9, 2004 22/7 is quite a good approximation...-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #47 January 9, 2004 Not being allowed to use a calculator in college is stupid. Are they trying to teach you physics or multiplication? If you use a calculator, you can be tested on your knowledge of physics in a more in-depth fashion. Seems like you had a professor with the "In my day..." problem. You don't see carpenters cutting boards with a handsaw because "In my day...", they use power saws. Tools of the modern age. Not only are people using calculators, but computers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #48 January 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteI remember one test that was particularly bad - the average score was 16 out of 100. Heh. I got a 14 out of 100 on a discrete math midterm. B minus! The adjustment was so extreme that the high scorer (70-something) didn't have to do any homework or even take the final to get an A in the class. I have found that when you wreck the curve, you receive threatening remarks, but you also get to study with the people of your choice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,067 #49 January 9, 2004 Quote22/7 is quite a good approximation... 355/113 is much better and fairly mnemonic (113/355 = 1/pi)... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites The111 1 #50 January 9, 2004 Quotethe bible and all religions was needed in order to explain things we dont understand, hence devine. I disagree. Religions are not needed, if you are content with not knowing what can't be known. The alternative is pretending to know something you can't.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 2,067 #49 January 9, 2004 Quote22/7 is quite a good approximation... 355/113 is much better and fairly mnemonic (113/355 = 1/pi)... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #50 January 9, 2004 Quotethe bible and all religions was needed in order to explain things we dont understand, hence devine. I disagree. Religions are not needed, if you are content with not knowing what can't be known. The alternative is pretending to know something you can't.www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
